Program of Creation of Man on Earth, in light of Quran.

[Islamic Mike]

Salaam Alaykum Hassan,

I am relatively new to posting on this forum. However, I did a search on the topic of the 6 days of creation to see the various perspectives on six human days and 6 GOD-days (periods), so to speak. I have posted your comment below mainly to help with your recollection of your earlier discussion. Here it is:

As I said earlier, I believe "six" days is of significance and the fact that there is no further confirmation that those days are thousands or tens of thousands of years or more.

But again, on what grounds can you assert that the word ayyamin (as in 6 ayyamin) automatically means six(6) human days? I am of the opinion that the word ayyamin (as in 6 ayyamin) means six periods or epochs, and not six human days; but if you say otherwise, then the burden is on you to prove said assertion from the Quran.
So when the Quran says that Allah created the universe in six days, that would mean six days with Allah, but for us it would be mean six periods or epochs.

Just one or 2 evidences will do for now as if too many is listed it's hard to take it all in and respond to them.

I will bear that in mind.

I came across a verse in the Quran that appears to allude to a 24-hour day given the context of the verse. I'm not an Arabic expert so, I'm posting my observation for others to validate. The verse in question 9:36. I've looked at the Arabic and every possible translation I could find (http://www.islamawakened.org/quran/9/36/default.htm), and they, essentially, all are saying the same thing. Here is an excerpt of the segment in question:

[9:36] Verily, the number of months with Allah is twelve months (shahran)  according to the law of Allah since the day (yawma) He created the heavens and the earth. Of these four (months) are sacred...

I study the Qu'ran from the assumption there are zero contradictions whereby any contradiction that is found is not the Qu'ran that is incorrect, but our interpretation. Having said that, 9:36 is directly referring to a 12-month 'human' year (so to speak) and this has been the law 'from the day' (yawma) HE created the heavens (l-samāwāti) and the earth.

I see three possible ways to interpret this:

1) it refers to the last day (day six) when everything was completed (earth, life, 7 heavens) allowing the 'period' interpretation, or

2) the first day when the heaven (l-samāi) and the earth were literally brought into existence (joined entity separated as per 21:30) prior to the fine-tuning, perfecting over the remaining 5 'days', or

3) the 'day' GOD actually said to the heavens (l-samāwāti) and the earth 'to come into existence willingly or unwilling' which upon careful study would be the second day of creation.

If 9:36 is referring to the last 'day' (sixth day) this would allow for the six 'periods' of 'GOD-days' interpretation. This would confirm the usage of the plural 'heavens' (l-samāwāti) in 9:36. Although, the usage of '(from the) day' (yawmi) seems to create some issues for a couple of reasons:

A) As far as I am aware (please correct me if I'm wrong), 'yawma' (day) has never been used in the Quran to signify anything other than a 24-hour human day, unlike 'ayyāmin' which could mean 'days' or 'periods.' Yet, it is used here. 

B) Irrespective of our interpretation of 'day', The Qu'ran indicates a six-day creation duration, not a one-day duration, which would seem to allude to the specific 'day' when both the 'heavens' (l-samāwāti) and the earth came into existence. That would be 'day two' when GOD said to the heavens and the earth come into existence willingly or unwillingly (see 41:11).

[41:11] Then He turned to the smoke, when it was still gas, and said to it, and to the earth, "Come into existence, willingly or unwillingly." They said, "We come willingly."

[41:12] In two days He determined them seven heavens, and He revealed to each heaven its commands. We decorated the lowest heaven with lamps and preserve them. Such is the decree of the Almighty, the Knower.

Based on the above, the first interpretation does not appear to align with 9:36 in light of other verses. The second interpretation cannot be correct because in the first 'day' there was only ONE heaven and the earth. The verse (9:36) clearly mentions 'heavens' (l-samāwāti), therefore it cannot be referring to the first day of creation. This leaves us with the aforementioned third interpretation focusing on the actual 'day' the heavenS (l-samāwāti) and the earth were created, which would be day 2. At this point, it is appropriate to post 41:9-12.
 
[41:9] Say, "You disbelieve in the One who created the earth in two days, and you set up idols to rank with Him, though He is Lord of the worlds."
[41:10] He placed therein firmly-set mountains, made it productive, and He calculated its provisions in four equal alike for those who ask.
[41:11] Then He turned to the heaven while it was still smoke, and He said to it, and to the earth, "Come into existence, willingly or unwillingly." They said, "We come willingly."
[41:12] Thus, He completed seven universes in two days, and set up the laws for every heaven. And we adorned the lowest heaven with lamps and (to) guard. That is the decree of the Almighty, All-Knower.

From what I can see, the 'heavenS' and the earth were created in a single day, namely Day two. This would leave us with the remaining four days/periods to fill the earth with life after the heavens and the earth was made. This brings us back to my initial question of whether the six days of creation were 24-hour days or GOD-days (periods). Since 9:36 indicates the count of months is 12 since the day the heavens and the earth were created, that would mean after the second day of creation we were on a 24-hour clock in order to calculate 12 months.

[9:36] Verily, the number of months with Allah is twelve months (shahran)  according to the law of Allah since the day (yawma) He created the heavens and the earth. Of these four (months) are sacred...

This would make sense as the sun (lamp) and the moon would have been created by the second day of Creation allowing us to calculate time.

[10:5] He (is) the One Who made the sun a shining light, and the moon a reflected light and determined for it phases, THAT YOU MANY KNOW (the) number (of) the YEARS and the count (of time). Not created Allah that except in truth. He explains the Signs for a people (who) know.

Based on the above, I have come to the conclusion the six days of Creation were, in fact, 24-hour days, not 'epochs/periods'. Otherwise, contradictions would arise in the Quran. Furthermore, this confirms the previous scripture's account (Genesis 1). If I have missed something in 9:36 please kindly point it out.

Regards, Mike

[niaz]

Peace!

Something to think about ....

Usually, /as-samaawti wal ard/ is attempted to be interpreted as the planet earth and the rest of the universe. And the verses about creation are attempted to be interpreted as _not_ referring to the instant of the creation of the cosmos itself [and prescription of its laws], but rather to the subsequent evolution of the planet earth as a habitable planet in the more recent past.

I disagree with this approach. The word /ard/ literally means 'land'. This planet earth is too insignificant to be described as a separate creation. There are billions on earth-like planets in the universe capable of sustaining life. The Quran [42:29] says that God has spread out living creatures throughout /as-samaawti wal ard/ (literally 'the skies and the land'). All rocky planets in the universe also have 'land', just as on earth. So 'land' is any place capable of originating or sustaining life: basically any stellar system made of matter, since we are all made out of star dust. Any place that humans can migrate to, live on or survive, or any stellar system where life can exist is /ard/. The primordial gas clouds, or matter that God created, from which stellar systems evolved was also /ard/.

The word /samaa`a/ literally means 'sky' - the space/vacuum around us that we can seen from land/matter. The plural /samawaat/ means 'skies'. Quran says that God created the 7 skies in 'layers' (67:3, 71:5). What we can observe is /samaa ad-duniya/: the 'sky of this world' or 'the lowest sky', adorned with 'lamps' (the stars we see when we gaze the sky) [67:3-5, 41:9-12]. Other skies (universes) are beyond our observable sky (universe).

41:12 tells us that each such sky/space/layer has its own physical laws (/amr/). It may be different from what we experience in our space, God knows best.

Also, the Quran teaches us that first God created the universes, and subsequently (/thumma/) assigned them their laws [balanced (/istawa/) the throne/dominion] (10:3, 2:29, 7:54, 25:59, 32:4, 57:4). The universe is governed by a system of equations or the balance that everything should adhere to, that was prescribed after the vacuum and matter were created.

Given this background, the "six days" refers to the very instant of creation itself. What is its significance? God known best. God says He creates in the 'blink of an eye' [54:49-50], so "six days" can not be understood literally as the day we experience on the planet earth today.

http://journal_of_submission.homestead.com/Quran.htm

Indeed your Lord is God, the One who created the skies and the land in six days then He established balance over the dominion. He decides all matters. ... [10:3]

Then He balanced the vacuum, and it was a smoke, He then said to it and to matter; "Come into existence willingly or unwillingly." They said; we come willingly. He then completed them as seven vacua in two days, and He inspired in each vacuum its law. And We adorned the lowest vacuum with lamps, and placed therein guards. Such is the design of The Almighty, The All Knowing. [41:11-12]

[Islamic Mike]

Peace Niaz,

Thank you for your response. I have reflected on the interpretation you presented. In fact, it has been my traditional interpretation for quite some time. The reason I posted my original comments was because I am of the firm conviction there are not any contradictions in the Qu'ran, only in our interpretations. As such, if an interpretation ends up contradicting, or appears to contradict, other verses it should be studied more deeply to ascertain an interpretation that accounts for the information present in all verses.

I understand what the current cosmology theory of the universe says. However, those in academic circles will tell you the current Big Bang Inflationary universe model is in serious trouble given the constant discovery of anomalous organizations of heavenly structures (ie: distribution of Quasars, galaxies, CMB etc) that challenge the current paradigm. Of course, this makes sense and 'science' has a terrible track record demonstrated by the constant change of theories since the beginning of the Age of Enlightenment. This reality about the 'science' should help us appreciate that it science cannot disprove scripture (Qu'ran), but scripture CAN confirm accurate science. Having said that, your response was not addressing my question about the content in the actual verses, but rather your perspective. Although, I do appreciate you sharing your perspective, I was really looking more for an analysis of my points which appear to indicate a possible contradiction with the 6 'periods' interpretation. As you said (which I fully agree) GOD can create the heavens and the earth instantly, over 6 twenty-four hour days, over 6 periods, or any number of periods. Knowing this, please kindly have another look at my previous post and try to factor out current scientific theories, which may or may not be completely accurate, to ensure a truly unbias study based on the content of the verses.

I have found that many of us, (unfortunately) myself included, have the tendency to translate or interpret verses to conform to current (constantly being updating) scientific theories rather than just look at the verses actually say and then formulating and interpretation. This can create a potentially serious problem for those of us who have 'science' as the 'determiner of truth' rather than the Creator (via Qu'ran), because their faith could be severely shaken when currently accepted scientific theories become falsified and thus, discarded for new theories. Whereas, if we look at the verses exactly as they are written without imposing our predispositions of how things aught to be, our faith, God willing, will never be shaken by agnostic and materialism-based philosophies that currently plague scientific interpretations of data. Especially, when it comes to theories on the origin of life and origin of the universe. 

Peace,
Mike

[niaz]

Peace Mike,

I am in complete agreement with your last paragraph, about the perils of constantly trying to reinterpret the Quran based on half baked scientific theories. And on looking "at the verses exactly as they are written without imposing our predispositions of how things aught to be".

My approach is to keep it very simple. We can use established scientific knowledge to inform our understanding of the Quran,  but we should not try to deliberately "fit" interpretations around evolving scientific theories. When the Quran does indeed confirm scientific understanding, it will be very evident. For whatever is not, we don't need to try to force one.

I don't see the need for an interpretation as "6 periods". For reasons I described in my previous post, I understand the Quran as describing the creation of space and matter itself in the “six days”, not specifically to the evolution of our planet earth. And I am not trying to relate this to any cosmology, since no cosmology captures how the cosmos was created. Scientific laws as we know them break down at the instant of creation. That is because God only prescribed the laws for our universe at this point.

Since there is no scientific theory that currently addresses this (and possibly never, since it lies beyond the scope of empiricism), I don't see a need to fit any specific scientific theory.

I also disagree that 'day' in the context of creation means 24 hours. Since meaning of "24 hours" is meaningless before the solar system evolved (only ~4.5 bya, which was about 9 billion years after creation). And "days" were not always 24 hours. The earth used to spin a lot faster before, and has been steadily slowing down. In the early earth, a day lasted only about 6 hours.

To understand where you are coming from - do you dispute these timelines or durations? Is it part of the cosmology theory you expressed skepticism about?

[Athman]

Dear Islamic Mike,

Salaam,

Welcome to the forum.

Kindly see my responses in italics to your comments in bold.

I came across a verse in the Quran that appears to allude to a 24-hour day given the context of the verse. I'm not an Arabic expert so, I'm posting my observation for others to validate. The verse in question 9:36. I've looked at the Arabic and every possible translation I could find (http://www.islamawakened.org/quran/9/36/default.htm), and they, essentially, all are saying the same thing. Here is an excerpt of the segment in question:

[9:36] Verily, the number of months with Allah is twelve months (shahran)  according to the law of Allah since the day (yawma) He created the heavens and the earth. Of these four (months) are sacred...

I study the Qu'ran from the assumption there are zero contradictions whereby any contradiction that is found is not the Qu'ran that is incorrect, but our interpretation. Having said that, 9:36 is directly referring to a 12-month 'human' year (so to speak) and this has been the law 'from the day' (yawma) HE created the heavens (l-samāwāti) and the earth.

Of course the Qur’an should be studied with such a proviso such that disparities in understanding/interpretations would well be appreciated as resultant from individuals’ fallible approaches. In my opinion, the above translation of the Arabic verse 9:36 captures the key overall interpretation. However, such an understanding of an allusion of a 24-hour day in 9:36 is untenable within the context. That a ‘12-month lunar year’ referred to in the verse as we recognize today (12-month 'human' year) gives way to acknowledge a ‘24-hour day’ interpretation of the ‘ayyam’ in the verse is not an explicit understanding to advance. For example, today, we know that 4-months are ‘sacred’ and that they are the ones in which pilgrimage is prescribed, as since the advent of prophet Ibrahim (22:26-32). However, for instance, as you may agree, claiming that pilgrimage started since ‘the day Allah created the heavens and the earth’ just because the ‘four sacred months’ appear in that verse would lead us to a faulty conclusion.

I see three possible ways to interpret this:

1) it refers to the last day (day six) when everything was completed (earth, life, 7 heavens) allowing the 'period' interpretation, or

2) the first day when the heaven (l-samāi) and the earth were literally brought into existence (joined entity separated as per 21:30) prior to the fine-tuning, perfecting over the remaining 5 'days', or

3) the 'day' GOD actually said to the heavens (l-samāwāti) and the earth 'to come into existence willingly or unwilling' which upon careful study would be the second day of creation.

In my humble opinion, if 70:4,32:5,22:47 are taken into consideration, one can appreciate why ‘ayyam’ is used in 9:36 in its essence as a slice of time expressed to give some human relevance, as Br. Joseph states in a thread [1] referenced below.


If 9:36 is referring to the last 'day' (sixth day) this would allow for the six 'periods' of 'GOD-days' interpretation. This would confirm the usage of the plural 'heavens' (l-samāwāti) in 9:36. Although, the usage of '(from the) day' (yawmi) seems to create some issues for a couple of reasons:

A) As far as I am aware (please correct me if I'm wrong), 'yawma' (day) has never been used in the Quran to signify anything other than a 24-hour human day, unlike 'ayyāmin' which could mean 'days' or 'periods.' Yet, it is used here. 

I think as far as being aware of a thing is concerned, a sincere confirmation of the same has to be assured before assuming a conviction from it. From several examples that could be quoted, I believe a clear contrast can be made between verses (62:9,5:3) and (70:4,32:5,22:47) or at least (11:103,1:4) where while the former allude to ‘our today’s 24-hour day,’ the latter refer to ‘epochs’ or long ‘periods’ of time. I trust that you don’t take the ‘Day of Judgement’ to be a regular ‘24-hour’ day at least from all that which is expected to take place within its entirety (Judgement of ‘all’ creation).

B) Irrespective of our interpretation of 'day', The Qu'ran indicates a six-day creation duration, not a one-day duration, which would seem to allude to the specific 'day' when both the 'heavens' (l-samāwāti) and the earth came into existence. That would be 'day two' when GOD said to the heavens and the earth come into existence willingly or unwillingly (see 41:11).

I think the difficulty in appreciating the holistic reference to the ‘yaum’ in 9:36 when Allah created the heavens and the earth lies at the fact that a conditional restriction has been made that the ‘yaum’ should be at least a ‘day’ amongst the 6 ‘ayyams’ of creation. In my opinion, this is unwarranted.

[41:11] Then He turned to the smoke, when it was still gas, and said to it, and to the earth, "Come into existence, willingly or unwillingly." They said, "We come willingly."

[41:12] In two days He determined them seven heavens, and He revealed to each heaven its commands. We decorated the lowest heaven with lamps and preserve them. Such is the decree of the Almighty, the Knower.

Based on the above, the first interpretation does not appear to align with 9:36 in light of other verses. The second interpretation cannot be correct because in the first 'day' there was only ONE heaven and the earth. The verse (9:36) clearly mentions 'heavens' (l-samāwāti), therefore it cannot be referring to the first day of creation. This leaves us with the aforementioned third interpretation focusing on the actual 'day' the heavenS (l-samāwāti) and the earth were created, which would be day 2. At this point, it is appropriate to post 41:9-12.
 
[41:9] Say, "You disbelieve in the One who created the earth in two days, and you set up idols to rank with Him, though He is Lord of the worlds."
[41:10] He placed therein firmly-set mountains, made it productive, and He calculated its provisions in four equal alike for those who ask.
[41:11] Then He turned to the heaven while it was still smoke, and He said to it, and to the earth, "Come into existence, willingly or unwillingly." They said, "We come willingly."
[41:12] Thus, He completed seven universes in two days, and set up the laws for every heaven. And we adorned the lowest heaven with lamps and (to) guard. That is the decree of the Almighty, All-Knower.

With such a premise to expect the ‘yaum’ in 9:36 as a ‘day’ from the 6 ‘distinct’ ayyams, you unnecessarily single out the ‘second’ distinct day to be the ‘yaum’ (9:36) owing to the completion of ‘the heavens’ by an assumed ‘day two’ (41:12). This is again unwarranted in my opinion. I fail to see why you conclude that only ‘one heaven’ was existing by the end of the ‘first’ ayyam, by simply inferring from 41:11-12, which is not explicitly clear to ‘affirm.’

From what I can see, the 'heavenS' and the earth were created in a single day, namely Day two. This would leave us with the remaining four days/periods to fill the earth with life after the heavens and the earth was made. This brings us back to my initial question of whether the six days of creation were 24-hour days or GOD-days (periods). Since 9:36 indicates the count of months is 12 since the day the heavens and the earth were created, that would mean after the second day of creation we were on a 24-hour clock in order to calculate 12 months.

From your conclusion of ‘day two’ being the time when ‘heavens and earth’ had been completely created, you say that a 24-hour day was initiated and hence ‘we’ were able to do the count as from then. This ‘theory’ assumes that ‘man’ was fully existing when this was ordained or at least sometimes before it. This is not something that can explicitly be confirmed from the Qur’an.

[9:36] Verily, the number of months with Allah is twelve months (shahran)  according to the law of Allah since the day (yawma) He created the heavens and the earth. Of these four (months) are sacred...

This would make sense as the sun (lamp) and the moon would have been created by the second day of Creation allowing us to calculate time.

In my humble opinion, as much as this somehow scientifically makes sense, it is however not a conclusion that can be explicitly confirmed as mentioned in the Qur’an.

[10:5] He (is) the One Who made the sun a shining light, and the moon a reflected light and determined for it phases, THAT YOU MANY KNOW (the) number (of) the YEARS and the count (of time). Not created Allah that except in truth. He explains the Signs for a people (who) know.

Based on the above, I have come to the conclusion the six days of Creation were, in fact, 24-hour days, not 'epochs/periods'. Otherwise, contradictions would arise in the Quran. Furthermore, this confirms the previous scripture's account (Genesis 1). If I have missed something in 9:36 please kindly point it out.

In my humble view, I still see no warrant for such a conclusion based on the premise that the ‘yaum’ in 9:36 has to be a ‘yaum’ from among the ‘6 ayyams’ in 4:9-12 and that sequential ‘day two’ is the ‘yaum’ in which the heavens and the earth had fully been created hence a 24-hour day provenance for ‘existing’ human beings to make reference to. To the contrary, I believe a ‘holistic’ reference is made to ‘when’ the heavens and the earth were created in 9:36 hence the number of months are 12 in a year, ‘from time immemorial,’ / ‘from the beginning of time.’

Hopefully that helps in some small way.


Regards,

Athman.



References:

[1]. Is Allah’s Day Equivalent to 1,000 yrs or 50,000 yrs?
http://quransmessage.com/forum/index.php?topic=405.0

[Athman]

Dear niaz,

Salaamun Alaikum,

Albeit I agree with you that ‘the earth’ in the oft-quoted reference of ‘the heavens and the earth’ (7:54) or rather ‘the earth and the heavens’ (20:4) in the Qur'an can be understood to be quintessential of other earth-like habitable stellar planets (65:12) with a side-note of an alternative meaning of ‘land,’ I see it as an unwarranted assertion to assume an always such general inference for each and every occurrence of the phrase 'the heavens and the earth' in the Qur'an. In fact, the other possibility could arguably be averred for, that is, the traditional understanding of 'the earth' being 'our planet earth' (2:29-30) especially with such a context of 'the earth' in 2:29 being an abode for Adam (2:30-31) as our progenitor. As a primary reference, 'the earth' (41:9) was created within 2 ayyams as well as 'the heavens' (41:12) with its/their 'laws' within the same 2 ayyams. In my humble opinion, the 2 ayyams would still possibly be the time bracket for the creation of the other earth-like habitable planets in 65:12, as well as would the 4 ayyams in 41:10 for the 'ordainment' of 'rawasiya' and 'aqwat' on 'the earth' also apply for some essential 'ordainment' on the other earth-like habitable planets.

In my humble opinion, as much as the term 'ardh' is implicitly being assumed to have a general meaning of 'any place capable of originating or sustaining life: basically any stellar system made of matter,' and 'the primordial gas clouds, or matter that God created, from which stellar systems evolved,' credence has to be given to the contextual reference of the term in the Qur'an along with its classical or well-known meaning given such context. The same applies to what 'samaa/samawat' would be taken to refer to. As long as this is concerned, I don't concur with your conclusive redefinition of 'samaa/samawat' or 'ardh' to 'vacuum/vacua(space)' and 'matter' respectively.

On the other hand, arguing from such a premise of the above redefinition of the terms 'samaa' and 'ardh', you make an extension of the idea to advocate for an 'instant' interpretation of the 6-ayyams hence not the actual evolutionary process of 'the heavens and the earth,' rather some infinitesimally instantaneous provenance of matter and space. In my opinion, this approach ignores the elaborations given in 41:9-12, especially with respect to how the 'ayyams' are distributed, supported by those of 79:27-33. Such descriptions are essentially alluding to some significance of the mention of 6 ayyams in the first place, aptly making up to the count (6 ayyams) as a general reference from the other 7 places mentioned in the Qur'an. The significance of its value (6) is only known to Allah as you intimated.

That the subsequent evolutionary process of 'the heavens and the earth' after the momentary 'decree' would conflict the fact that 'universal/scientific laws' found provenance at the 'instant' of the decree is not a plausible counter-argument in my opinion. The ‘inspiration’ of the ‘amr’ for each ‘samaa’(41:12) needs not necessarily be ‘after’ their complete creation.

With regards interpretation of the verses as referring to the subsequent evolutionary process of ‘the heavens and the earth’ after its ‘decree,’ I see this as a cogent proposition as compared to that of an instantaneous occurrence of 6 ayyams especially with such a summarized elucidatory description of how the 6 ayyams were distributed over the evolutionary events (41:9-12). As to whether this is taken to refer some process of ‘some more recent past,’ this doesn’t deny the fact that 6 ayyams were over which ‘the heavens and the earth’ and what exists in between ordained. Relative to any point in time and whatever the referential time system/frame, the ‘heavens and the earth’ took 6 ayyams to ‘materialize.’ The equivalent standard of a single ‘yaum’ would in effect depend on the point of reference in time. The exact distinct equivalent of a ‘yaum’ as given in the verses is only known to Allah. This can as well be supported by such relativeness of ‘yaum’ as in 70:4, 32:5, or 22:47.   

 
Regards,

Athman.

[niaz]

Athman, Salaamun 'alaikum

Thanks for sharing.

Regarding 2:29-30, I do not see it as restricted to the planet earth. 2:30 is fulfilled in 2:31-39 that follow.

2:31-35 happen in paradise (some place outside our current universe), where we all were once there (2:38, 7:172, 33:72).

2:36-38 talk about the eviction of our parents and ourselves to "the land" (in this current universe). It tells us how we came here for a temporary stay (from paradise), and what our purpose in life should be in order to be successful here ("when you receive guidance from Me, whoever follows My guidance ...." in 2:38).

It covers land in this universe, on the planet earth, and wherever humans may colonize by God's will in the future. Very soon, humans could be colonizing Mars and other places in our universe. The planet earth itself is neither special nor remarkable in the grand scheme of our universe.

[niaz]

Athman, salaamun 'alaikum

Also, the classical view was shaped by a geocentric perspective of our universe. Now as we know more a lot more than what was known back then, we update our understanding accordingly.

Regarding 41:9-12, yes the verses describe a breakdown of 'days' for creating matter (two), and making matter sustainable for life (four) ... i.e., decreed the laws that are fine tuned for life; and the creation of all the seven vacua/spaces/universes (two).

I am not saying it is necessarily "instantaneous". I am only saying the description is of the very beginning of creation, not the of the 9 or 10 billion years it took for this planet earth to form and become habitable. I do not know the timescale involved, or understand whether a time scale has any significance, since time itself was created when space and matter were created.

Peace.

[Athman]

Dear niaz,

Wa alaikumus salaam,

You shared:

“Thanks for sharing.

Regarding 2:29-30, I do not see it as restricted to the planet earth. 2:30 is fulfilled in 2:31-39 that follow.

2:31-35 happen in paradise (some place outside our current universe), where we all were once there (2:38, 7:172, 33:72).

2:36-38 talk about the eviction of our parents and ourselves to "the land" (in this current universe). It tells us how we came here for a temporary stay (from paradise), and what our purpose in life should be in order to be successful here ("when you receive guidance from Me, whoever follows My guidance ...." in 2:38).

It covers land in this universe, on the planet earth, and wherever humans may colonize by God's will in the future. Very soon, humans could be colonizing Mars and other places in our universe. The planet earth itself is neither special nor remarkable in the grand scheme of our universe.”

I am sure the following article by Br. Joseph addresses some of your contentions above. On a side-note, identifying ‘the earth’ as ‘our planet earth’ in some of the instances it appears as mentioned in the Qur’an does not deem it so special or remarkable as you put it rather at least the relevant ‘world’ in which we live and whose inhabitants are directly addressed by the Qur’an. Other ‘lands,’ possibly Mars inclusive, are not whose ‘possible’ inhabitants find direct and primary address from the Quran’s way of address especially with such notable and well-known places on ‘our earth’ like Makkah, Rome, Midian, etc., mentioned therein.

http://quransmessage.com/articles/adam%20and%20jannah%20FM3.htm


You then commented:

Also, the classical view was shaped by a geocentric perspective of our universe. Now as we know more a lot more than what was known back then, we update our understanding accordingly.

In as much as your proposition that ‘the classical view was shaped by a geocentric perspective of our universe’ assumably holds, it can as well be arguably asserted that the Qur’an primarily addresses the contemporaneous classical audience, in a manner familiar to what would readily be appreciated in that context.

You again shared:

I am not saying it is necessarily "instantaneous". I am only saying the description is of the very beginning of creation, not the of the 9 or 10 billion years it took for this planet earth to form and become habitable. I do not know the timescale involved, or understand whether a time scale has any significance, since time itself was created when space and matter were created.

Respectfully, I don’t actually understand what you specifically mean by the phrase ‘of the very beginning.’ I readily accept that space, time and matter were created. However, I acknowledge that words have meanings and their use is more significantly relevant to whom they are primarily addressed. I believe that ‘yaum’ (plural - ayyam) would not be an exception, with at least a time connotation, specifically ‘an expressed slice of time that gives some human relevance.’

Therefore, ‘6 ayyam’ would refer to ‘time periods,’ the actual timescale for such a ‘yaum’ not relevant to us, at least as deemed by the Qur’an in such a context. However, at least some relativeness of such-like ‘ayyam’ is alluded to in other verses from different contexts (23:112-113,32:5,10:45,2:196,2:203) and thus to have some human relevance, and as to why they are even deemed worth of mention for the Quran’s audience, interpreting them to be ‘aeons’ would not conflict the overarching Qur’anic aspect of time. You may also at least agree with me that a decree for ‘materialization’ of something by Allah could either be ‘momentary’ or ‘over time,’ at least from our perspective (time-bound).

On the other hand, I don’t subscribe to any advocacy of such theories describing the creation like that ‘of the 9 or 10 billion years,’ unless it is a theory that would find some unequivocal support from the Qur’an, at most something clear (18:22). However, accepting or rejecting them as truth or proof is another matter, and would arguably be debateable from my humble point of view.

Regards,
Athman.

[niaz]

Salaamun 'alaikum Athman,

Regarding your query, "I don’t actually understand what you specifically mean by the phrase ‘of the very beginning.’ ", ... what I meant is that in the very beginning there was nothing. Then suddenly there was something (or more accurately, 'everything'). There was space-time and matter. And then there were laws governing how they interacted (fundamental forces, and whatever else). I understand the creation verses as referring to bringing this 'everything' that we see around us into existence.

Sorry if I sound like a broken record, but let me try one more time, to phrase my thoughts in a different way.

I must confess that I previously understood أَيَّامٍ in the context of the creation verses as periods or aeons, for almost 30 years, ever since I read Bucaille as a 12 year old. Verses like 41:11 [Bucaille's translation below] did not completely make sense when understood with the meaning is restricted to the planet earth. But I still managed to put away and ignore these minor nagging questions (see below), and move on.

"Moreover (tumma) He turned to heaven when it was smoke and said to it and to the earth: come willingly or unwillingly! They said: we come in willing obedience.


Why would it refer to the actual formation of the tiny insignificant speck (planet earth) along with formation of the rest of the universe? Especially when the speck is no different. The same 100+ elements found on earth are the same elements found everywhere else. And the sun is a rather young star, its planets, including the earth are recent formations. Long before our sun and the earth formed, billions of other stars with billions of planets were already in existence. Is this verse really describing the formation of the earth (insignificant speck) and the sky (everything else in the universe besides this speck) in the same breath?

Until I came across an alternate reading of 41:11 recently, based on the meaning of أَرْضُ as land ... any land made of these 100+ elements; and سَّمَاءِ as space/vacuum around it [as in the translation from godalone.org, below]. And 41:11 made full sense to me instantly. As did other verses on creation.

Then He balanced the vacuum, and it was a smoke, He then said to it and to matter; "Come into existence willingly or unwillingly." They said; we come willingly.


And this is far more profound and mystifying than one particular trivial instance of a planet condensing around a star.

I would like to also state that I do not consider this as a "proposition" or a "redefinition" of the Arabic words سَمَوَاتٍ and  أَرْضُ, or a radical theory or idea. I see it as the simple process of refining my understanding of a verse and related verses [specifically the verses addressing creation of the cosmos], as I continue reading the Quran. The occurrence of these words in other verses do not have to be understood the exact same way. There are nuances in meaning of words, in certain contexts they can take different meanings than in other contexts. I am not saying that أَرْضُ does not mean or can never be understood as earth. That would be a very dumb thing to say. I am referring specifically to the creation verses only. When God is describing the creation of the cosmos to us, through human language of Arabic, the language that was spoken by Muhammad and his community, we should not restrict the meanings to those based on geocentric or anthropomorphic perspectives. Of course, in other verses, that relate to our experiences as humans [e.g., your reference to Makkah, Rome, Midian], it is perfectly acceptable to do that.

On 2:30, you can also understand it as planet earth. I only said I see no need to restrict the meaning to earth. But you can also read it as earth if you want. I read Joseph's article on Jannah ... thats a separate topic, that has no direct bearing on this discussion. I can comment on it another time.

And yes, if you say ayyam connotates a 'slice of time', thats perfectly fine (without grappling wth the idea that time itself was also created).

Finally, I would like to state that I think it does not matter much what one's final conclusion is on this question ... whether it is six 24-hour days, six periods or aeons stretching out until this planet earth formed ~4.5 bya, or six 'days'/stages until matter and space-time were created. Finally what is most important is the spiritual message of the Quran - to worship God alone. Thanks for considering my understanding as worthy of this discussion ... hopefully it has been fruitful.  And hope we do not miss the forest for the trees as we stay zoomed into this particular topic.

Peace.

[niaz]

Athman, and completely switching topics, since you asked me to check out the article on whether جَنَّةَ was on earth (this is orthogonal to the discussion on the limits on the meaning of أرْضِ).

The basic premise of the article is that ".... there is no direct evidence in the Quran for such an assertion", meaning that the Quran is silent on this question, and hence either viewpoint is equally valid. And on the basis of this premise, it evaluates reasons that can favor the idea that جَنَّةَ could have been on earth.

But based on a simple, in context, sequential reading of the verses 2:35-36, I have to conclude that جَنَّةَ (paradise) is not in الأرْضِ (the land/earth). Since in 2:35 Adam, with his wife, are invited to live in paradise. Then after the original sin, Adam, his wife, and all of us, are evicted from paradise and then sent to earth (2:36). Which means that we were not in the earth to begin with. I consider this direct evidence.

And We said to Adam, dwell in paradise -  جَنَّةَ - , you and your wife and eat from it whatever you desire, however, do not approach this tree, lest both of you become transgressors.   
However, Satan duped the two of them and caused their eviction from where they were, and We said; go down as enemies of one another, and the land/earth - الأرْضِ - shall be your abode and sustenance for awhile.
Subsequently, Adam received from his Lord words by which He accepted his repentance. Indeed, He is The Accepter of Repentance, The All Merciful.
We said, go down from here all of you.  Then when you receive guidance from Me, whoever follows My guidance has nothing to fear nor will he grieve.
[2:35-38]


A second problem is that we were also in جَنَّةَ (this is alluded to in 2:36, and reconfirmed in 2:38; also see 33:72, 7:172). If  جَنَّةَ were on earth, it would mean that we reincarnated on the earth.

A third problem is that the earth is only a temporary abode "for awhile" (إِلَى حِي). Our primary existence was in جَنَّةَ, this world is just a sojourn to make amends for the incident described in 2:36. The جَنَّةَ we return to is other wordly. The جَنَّةَ near which Muhammad was transported to was other worldly (53:15). The جَنَّةَ we came from should also be expected to be other worldly.

Peace.

[Athman]

Dear Br. niaz,

Wa alaikumus salaam,

Thanks for your detailed and informative reply.

Kindly see my responses in blue italics to your comments.

Regarding your query, "I don’t actually understand what you specifically mean by the phrase ‘of the very beginning.’ ", ... what I meant is that in the very beginning there was nothing. Then suddenly there was something (or more accurately, 'everything'). There was space-time and matter. And then there were laws governing how they interacted (fundamental forces, and whatever else). I understand the creation verses as referring to bringing this 'everything' that we see around us into existence.

What I have been contending with your idea of ‘everything suddenly appearing’ is that this doesn’t have to necessarily be understood as ‘suddenly’ in the sense of the word. With such descriptive elaborations in chapters 41 and 79, and use of ‘time-connotative’ ayyam (singular-yaum), one is inclined to interpret the creation as spread over ‘periods’ of time, at least from human perspective.

Sorry if I sound like a broken record, but let me try one more time, to phrase my thoughts in a different way.

I must confess that I previously understood أَيَّامٍ in the context of the creation verses as periods or aeons, for almost 30 years, ever since I read Bucaille as a 12 year old. Verses like 41:11 [Bucaille's translation below] did not completely make sense when understood with the meaning is restricted to the planet earth. But I still managed to put away and ignore these minor nagging questions (see below), and move on.

"Moreover (tumma) He turned to heaven when it was smoke and said to it and to the earth: come willingly or unwillingly! They said: we come in willing obedience.


Why would it refer to the actual formation of the tiny insignificant speck (planet earth) along with formation of the rest of the universe? Especially when the speck is no different. The same 100+ elements found on earth are the same elements found everywhere else. And the sun is a rather young star, its planets, including the earth are recent formations. Long before our sun and the earth formed, billions of other stars with billions of planets were already in existence. Is this verse really describing the formation of the earth (insignificant speck) and the sky (everything else in the universe besides this speck) in the same breath?

It's Okay, no need to be sorry brother. You are actually clear. Sure. The ‘Earth’ is insignificant when considering the grand whole Universe. As I intimated earlier, the ‘Earth’ could be regarded archetypical of other ‘lands’ (65:12) and so ‘ardh’ doesn’t necessarily and restrictively refer to Planet Earth. However, the opposite also stands as far as the relevant Qur’anic references are concerned. Furthermore, what the 7th Century Arabian audience would readily relate to as far as the term ‘ardh’ is concerned would be what had been classically extant. This would arguably also acknowledge their limited scope and ambit on what incorporates the Cosmos, at that time.

Until I came across an alternate reading of 41:11 recently, based on the meaning of أَرْضُ as land ... any land made of these 100+ elements; and سَّمَاءِ as space/vacuum around it [as in the translation from godalone.org, below]. And 41:11 made full sense to me instantly. As did other verses on creation.

Then He balanced the vacuum, and it was a smoke, He then said to it and to matter; "Come into existence willingly or unwillingly." They said; we come willingly.


And this is far more profound and mystifying than one particular trivial instance of a planet condensing around a star.

I would like to also state that I do not consider this as a "proposition" or a "redefinition" of the Arabic words سَمَوَاتٍ and  أَرْضُ, or a radical theory or idea. I see it as the simple process of refining my understanding of a verse and related verses [specifically the verses addressing creation of the cosmos], as I continue reading the Quran.

As much as the above is respectfully appreciated, one has to be cautious accepting a ‘sense-making’
refined understanding that might otherwise be tantamount to a somehow whole redefinition of the term especially as classically understood or even with modern-day extant nuance. Unless a citation of some unequivocal Qur’anic support is made, or else from well-known classical Arabic lexicons or references, a ‘one’ organization website interpretation would be untenable from my humble opinion, despite it somehow making sense especially as regards some theological scruples over some understanding.

The occurrence of these words in other verses do not have to be understood the exact same way. There are nuances in meaning of words, in certain contexts they can take different meanings than in other contexts. I am not saying that أَرْضُ does not mean or can never be understood as earth. That would be a very dumb thing to say. I am referring specifically to the creation verses only. When God is describing the creation of the cosmos to us, through human language of Arabic, the language that was spoken by Muhammad and his community, we should not restrict the meanings to those based on geocentric or anthropomorphic perspectives. Of course, in other verses, that relate to our experiences as humans [e.g., your reference to Makkah, Rome, Midian], it is perfectly acceptable to do that.

I concur. As an addition, I would still assert that the 7th Century Arabian context has to be appreciated, especially the ambit of their know-how pertaining Cosmos during the Quran’s revelation, when understanding such terms.

On 2:30, you can also understand it as planet earth. I only said I see no need to restrict the meaning to earth. But you can also read it as earth if you want. I read Joseph's article on Jannah ... thats a separate topic, that has no direct bearing on this discussion. I can comment on it another time.

With Br. Joseph’s article, of which I don’t have any qualms with as far as the subject matter is concerned, replete with relevant Qur’anic verses and well presented, you would agree with me that your statement ‘in paradise (some place outside our current universe),’ would best be argued against using such an exposition as that in the article.

And yes, if you say ayyam connotates a 'slice of time', thats perfectly fine (without grappling wth the idea that time itself was also created).

Finally, I would like to state that I think it does not matter much what one's final conclusion is on this question ... whether it is six 24-hour days, six periods or aeons stretching out until this planet earth formed ~4.5 bya, or six 'days'/stages until matter and space-time were created. Finally what is most important is the spiritual message of the Quran - to worship God alone. Thanks for considering my understanding as worthy of this discussion ... hopefully it has been fruitful.  And hope we do not miss the forest for the trees as we stay zoomed into this particular topic.

Of course brother it has been much fruitful especially with your insights. As far as this discussion is concerned, I don’t agree with your summarized conclusion per se. I do fully appreciate that the ultimate goal is to grasp the spiritual message of the Qur’an. However, I find it necessary that as a believer, one has an obligation to do the best they can in striving towards truth upholding the same, honestly within their ambit of knowledge. It matters having a fully convinced conclusion presented as a rational argument against some topic in an academic discussion towards pursuit of knowledge, especially as one supported by the Qur’an.


Athman, and completely switching topics, since you asked me to check out the article on whether جَنَّةَ was on earth (this is orthogonal to the discussion on the limits on the meaning of أرْضِ).

The basic premise of the article is that ".... there is no direct evidence in the Quran for such an assertion", meaning that the Quran is silent on this question, and hence either viewpoint is equally valid. And on the basis of this premise, it evaluates reasons that can favor the idea that جَنَّةَ could have been on earth.

You may also want to reconsider the ‘Final Thoughts’ of the article [1] by Br. Joseph as referenced below: “Given the discussions above it appears that both Adam (pbuh) and his spouse were created for the purposes to reside on Earth as vicegerents. What changed was the state of felicity that they initially acquired and after sinning, were subsequently banished from it till a term appointed.”
 


But based on a simple, in context, sequential reading of the verses 2:35-36, I have to conclude that جَنَّةَ (paradise) is not in الأرْضِ (the land/earth). Since in 2:35 Adam, with his wife, are invited to live in paradise. Then after the original sin, Adam, his wife, and all of us, are evicted from paradise and then sent to earth (2:36). Which means that we were not in the earth to begin with. I consider this direct evidence.

And We said to Adam, dwell in paradise -  جَنَّةَ - , you and your wife and eat from it whatever you desire, however, do not approach this tree, lest both of you become transgressors.   

I recommend the section ‘ADAM (pbuh) WAS MADE FOR THE EARTH’ in the article [1].

However, Satan duped the two of them and caused their eviction from where they were, and We said; go down as enemies of one another, and the land/earth - الأرْضِ - shall be your abode and sustenance for awhile.
Subsequently, Adam received from his Lord words by which He accepted his repentance. Indeed, He is The Accepter of Repentance, The All Merciful.
We said, go down from here all of you.  Then when you receive guidance from Me, whoever follows My guidance has nothing to fear nor will he grieve.
[2:35-38]


A second problem is that we were also in جَنَّةَ (this is alluded to in 2:36, and reconfirmed in 2:38; also see 33:72, 7:172). If  جَنَّةَ were on earth, it would mean that we reincarnated on the earth.

I hope that the section 'GO DOWN' in the article [1] addresses your contention. Specifically, I trust that understanding Adam and His spouse as representative (quintessential) of all of Humankind would make it easy appreciating the use of the phrase ‘ba’dhukum liba’dhi ‘aduwwun’ – as enemies to one another (2:36).

A third problem is that the earth is only a temporary abode "for awhile" (إِلَى حِي). Our primary existence was in جَنَّةَ, this world is just a sojourn to make amends for the incident described in 2:36. The جَنَّةَ we return to is other wordly. The جَنَّةَ near which Muhammad was transported to was other worldly (53:15). The جَنَّةَ we came from should also be expected to be other worldly.

I think that as much as your argument for the ‘Adam’s destined abode’ in the Universe is concerned, you make some assumptions and quote some Qur’anic verses that open up to other topics (e.g, Muhammad was transported to was other worldly (53:15), also see 33:72, 7:172 ) of which would be out of scope of this discussion. On the other hand, referring you to some articles for reference of the same is interpreted as being orthogonal to this discussion. In my humble view, as far as this discussion is concerned, I would advise that you try to reconsider your Qur’anic verses quoted in support of the contention you try to make lest it seemingly turns to being unrelated to the subject matter of the foregoing discussion.



Regards,
Athman.


References:

[1]. ADAM (pbuh) AND JANNAH - AN EARTHLY ABODE OR PARADISE?

http://quransmessage.com/articles/adam%20and%20jannah%20FM3.htm

[niaz]

Salaam Athman. Thanks for the response. You have shared your perspective, and I had shared mine. We can trust that each of us will "consider" and "reconsider" what the other has said and form our own views, in our own course of time, without feeling the need to make each other agree.

For the meaning of السَّمَوَتِ وَالأرْضَ in the verses on creation (e.g., 41:11), I don't have anything further to add, beyond what I have already stated before. Just a comment on considering the context of a "7th century Arabian" ... I agree in many cases, it is judicious to do so; e.g., when God tells us not to eat the meat of the خِنْزِيرِ  (pig) or to observe the صَّلَوٰةَ (contact prayer) or perform the سُّجُودِ (prostration) etc. there is no reason to pretend not to know the meaning, or ask silly questions on how to follow the commandment. We just "hear and obey" using the known, established meaning of the word, just like the 7th century Arab would have been expected to simply obey without questioning the meaning himself.

At the same time, the Quran is a living book, and God continues to reveal His signs in nature and scripture to every generation. What we know now on natural phenomena, by God's leave, may be a lot more than what previous generations or 7th century Arabs knew, and we shape our understanding of the Quran accordingly, especially if the old interpretation or ascribed meaning contradicts or makes little sense in the light of what we now know. For example, today, we can understand عَلَقٍ [e.g., 96:2] as the embryo that is 'implanted' or 'hanging' on the uterine wall. The 7th century Arab may have understood it as 'blood clot'. We can look at the range of meanings of the word, and revise our understanding based on our current knowledge, without restricting ourselves to what might have been known in the 7th century.

On جَنَّةَ (paradise) being on earth, I had read through the article when you first cited it, and the arguments I raised were specifically those that were not addressed in the article to begin with. Then referring me back to the article is of little help.  My main point is that the destination of the relocation is clearly mentioned as الأرْضِ (earth). If you are told that you are going down from place A, and your dwelling is now going to be in place B for some time, it is obvious / common sense that place A is not already in place B. There is no reference to this made in the article.

And as a matter of general approach to understanding the Quran, I advocate reading the Quran sequentially [verse after verse], and in context, and take the simple, evident, common sense meaning that is imported by a whole passage or series of verses. The simple meaning here is that we were in some place  جَنَّةَ, and as a consequence of the original sin, we were relocated from that place to this earth. Of course, this was in accordance with God's plan (2:30). Now if we make inferences and try to extrapolate interpretations [تَأْوِيلِ] from Quranic verses, and claim that those interpretations contradict the simple meaning of a Quranic passage, in my  view, there is a problem with those interpretations, and the simple meaning of the passage is what we need to accept. What is the reason in the first place to dispute or question what the passage is telling us? What is the relevance of this question? How does it matter?

I personally considered this idea (of paradise on earth) at a time when I [mistakenly] thought that it made the event compatible with the theory of evolution. And later abandoned it when I realized that the spiritual message, and the import on the purpose of our life, was lost; and it was not what the passage was literally saying.

A second matter that I had mentioned, that was not addressed in the article either, is that all of us, including you and me, were also in جَنَّةَ. This is clear from 2:38, which is addressed to each of us, until the end of time. Just because the article did not address it does not make it "out of the scope of this discussion". The further verses I quoted, were only to establish what 2:38 already made very clear. And the idea that Adam and his wife are 'representative' of humankind would only strengthens this, and not contradict it, as it would mean that all of humankind were in جَنَّةَ, just like Adam and his wife.

[2:38] We said, go down from here all of you.  Then when you receive guidance from Me, whoever follows My guidance has nothing to fear nor will he grieve.


Peace.

[Athman]

Br. niaz,

Salaamun Alaikum,

Dear brother, it is not my intention to make you agree to my perspective nor somebody else’s. I am humbly parting with my view as regards the subject of this thread, trying as much possible to align my opinions to the best meaning I can get from the Qur’anic verses and as consistent possible. Telling you to ‘reconsider’ the final thoughts of Br. Joseph’s article is just because personally, I feel that you seem to cherry-pick some statements made therein, others as claimed premise of the article, and others overlooking their context. Rather, the ‘Final Thoughts’ stand at a better position to summarize the discourse. To reconsider your Qur’anic citations is just so that you don’t feel I’m making you switch topics nor insinuating some orthogonal discussions, rather addressing your supporting references which seem to be addressed somewhere else in detail.

I agree with your understanding of considering a 7th Century Arabian context - as regards placing certain Qur’anic extracts in their appropriate context, and refining our understanding of certain concepts and terminologies. I’m just trying to be cautious not to ‘redefine’ terms or render their ‘essential’ purport vague. In my humble opinion, if not how a concept is used as reiterated in some of the Qur’anic discourses, the classical understanding would better place the ‘essence’ of such a concept at its appropriate context - the essence.

With ‘Adam’s destined abode,’ referring you to the article is not intended necessarily to be of much help somehow as you would expect, but because I personally feel that your arguments are addressed therein and because you continuously assert that ‘no reference’ is made to the effect, I still have to refer you to the same article [1].

Respectfully Br. niaz, I haven’t seen any unequivocal Qur’anic support you have given hitherto to support your conclusive assertion that some prior ‘sinning’ had to take place before  Adam could be ‘transported’ to their ‘destined abode’ in the first place (2:30). As stated in the article, ‘there is no disconnect in the theme of the Quranic narrative and therefore there is no reason to assume that the location has changed.’ (2:30-35) About ‘what we need to accept,’ I don’t think there’s any extrapolation of interpretation made whatsoever but the Qur’anic narrative is made use of as appears in the Qur’an, as regards an advanced theme and plot.

Personally, I see the discourse made as per the Qur’anic narrative and not a pre-conceived assumption to conflate some theological perspective nor a world-wide or scientific view like that of evolution.

Regarding the scope of this discussion, whether or not we are also included in 2:36-38 is not relevant. However, it is relevant to the ‘Adam’s destined abode’ topic - out of scope of this one, and as I pointed out earlier, ‘ba’dhukum liba’dhi ‘aduwwun’ - as enemies to one another (2:36) can essentially be understood as referring to the two spouses - Adam & his partner (...fa azallahuma...fa akhrajahuma - 2:36), as representative of the Humankind. Similarly, you may want to understand ‘ihbithu minha jami’a’ as referring to the ‘representative’ couple (2:36) or rather with Iblees (7:13) - not necessarily with ‘all’ of Humankind - ‘us’ actually being the audience.

In the main dear Br. niaz, we just have to part with our sincere understandings as primarily evidenced from the Qur’an and try stay as consistent possible holistically with a rational approach. We may consider and reconsider the views of others as we try to filter and discern with the criterial Qur’an and as well agree to disagree at some point if it warrants.


Regards,
Athman.


REFERENCE:

[1]. ADAM (pbuh) AND JANNAH - AN EARTHLY ABODE OR PARADISE?
http://quransmessage.com/articles/adam%20and%20jannah%20FM3.htm

[niaz]

Salaam Athman,

I did the best I could to highlight/bold the source and destination locations, which are clearly and separately identified, to get your attention to this, which I personally consider the "direct evidence" that the article made the claim as missing. I rest my case with this post, insha allah; I'll try to summarize my takeaway from the passage, and the other passages in the Quran that relate the same history. And yes, we were destined to be here, but the pre-destination does not contradict the fact that we are here as a consequence of the original sin. I don't know if you are suggesting that we are not here as a result of it. The pharaoh was predestined to drown in the sea, but his drowning was also a consequence of his tyrannical ways he led his life on earth. The event is also repeated in 7:10-25, 20:115-127. In both these cases, just like in 2:30-39, it is first prefaced by the 'destined' end result (as in 2:30) - that  humanity was established on the land/earth (7:10), and how Adam forgot the covenant he had with God, because he did not stand firm to satan (20:115). Then all three accounts proceed to detail the logical sequence of events, starting from our creation, and  God's commandment to the angels to acknowledge or honor us for the intellectual capabilities God bestowed upon us ....

(0) Preface (2:30, 7:10, 20:115), introducing God's plan to place a substitute or successor on the land/earth, and the result: that Adam broke God's covenant under the influence of satan; and that we are established upon the earth [fulfilled through events (3) or (4) below].
(1) Creation of Adam and each of us (7:11), God's command to the angels, and the disobedience and fall of satan
(2) Dwelling of Adam/wife in paradise and the commandment of the tree
(3) Satan tricking Adam/wife into breaking the commandment of the tree.
(4) The expulsion of Adam/wife and satan, with "all of you" (addressing the audience of the Quran) to another place - the earth - as a temporary abode.
(5) Then during his earthly life, Adam receives words/guidance from God; and God accepts Adam's repentance.
(6) The purpose of our temporary existence here on this on earth, outlined for the rest of us ("all of you" ... the audience of the Quran) ...

• that we will receive guidance from God, and whoever among us will follow God's guidance has nothing to fear or grieve. If we turn to God, our repentance will be accepted, just as Adam's was.
• And if we reject/ignore God's reminder/proofs when it comes to us, we will end up among those who are ignored on the Day of Judgement.

This is the best answer we have to the deepest and most fundamental question in the mind of every human ... why are we here on earth? what is the purpose of our existence here? And this is a logical sequence - (4) was a consequence of (3), and (5) the atonement (tawba) for what happened in (3). If we don't read it as a simple and logical narrative, and break it up and make conclusions that are contradictory to this narrative, the message is lost. You have clarified that you do not have 'a pre-conceived assumption to conflate some theological perspective nor a world-wide or scientific view ...', but I failed to see the underlying reason to dispute or offer a counter narrative to the simple, logical, narration of events.

I admit I would have come across as opinionated .... my goal was not to badger, but to communicate my thoughts, and highlight the gaps in our perspectives. This has been an interesting and enlightening discussion, and thanks to you for that.

Peace.

أعوذ بالله من الشيطان الرجيم

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

[2:30-39]And when your Lord said to the angels, I am the appointer of a substitute on the land, they said will You appoint someone therein who will spread corruption and shed blood, while we glorify and praise You and consider You sacred?  He said I have complete knowledge while you do not know.    And He taught Adam all the names, afterwards, He presented them to the angels and said, inform Me of these names if you are truthful.    They said, glory be to You, we have no knowledge except what You have taught us. Indeed, You are The All Knowing, The All Wise.    He said, O Adam; inform them of their names. Once he informed them of their names, He said, did I not tell you that I fully know the secret of the vacua and matter and fully know what you declare and what you conceal.    And when We said to the angels; honor Adam, they all honored him, except Iblis who refused; he turned arrogant and became a disbeliever.    And We said to Adam, dwell in paradise, you and your wife and eat from it whatever you desire, however, do not approach this tree, lest both of you become transgressors.    However, Satan duped the two of them and caused their eviction from where they were, and We said; go down as enemies of one another, and the land shall be your abode and sustenance for awhile.    Subsequently, Adam received from his Lord words by which He accepted his repentance. Indeed, He is The Accepter of Repentance, The All Merciful.    We said, go down from here all of you. Then when you receive guidance from Me, whoever follows My guidance has nothing to fear nor will he grieve.    As for those who are unfaithful and rejected Our proofs, they are dwellers of Hell. They will abide therein eternally.

[7:10-25] And, We certainly established you on the land and provided for you therein sustenance. Indeed very few are grateful.    And indeed, We created you, then We designed you, We then said to the angels to honor Adam, they immediately honored him except Iblees who was not one of the honorers.    He said; what prevented you from honoring him when I commanded you? He said; I am better than he, You created me from fire and you created him from clay.   He said; then you shall go down therefrom, for you shall never be arrogant therein, therefore, get out, for indeed you are lowly.   He said; respite me until the Day of Resurrection.   He said; you shall have a respite.    He said; since you have enticed me, I will surely divert them from Your straight path.   Then I will surely come to them from their front and their back and their right and their left; and You will find most of them ungrateful.     He said; get out therefrom debased and expelled. Indeed those among them who follow you, I will surely fill Gehenna with you altogether.   As for you O Adam, you shall settle, you and your wife in Paradise, and eat from whatever the two of you desire, however, do not approach this one tree, lest you will transgress.   Thereafter, Satan duped them in order to reveal what was hidden of their bodies and said; your Lord did not forbid you from this tree except to prevent you from becoming angels or becoming immortal.     And he swore by both that indeed I am giving you good advice.    He therefore caused their fall with a lie.   Consequently, once both tasted the tree, their bodies became visible to them and they tried to cover themselves with the leaves of Paradise.  And their Lord called upon them; did I not forbid this tree for the two of you and did I not tell you both that Satan is your most ardent enemy?   They said, our Lord, we have been unjust towards our own souls and if You do not forgive us and do not have mercy upon us, we will surely end up losers.   He said; go down as enemies of one another. And the land will be your abode and sustenance for a while.   He said; in it you will live and in it you will die and from it you will come out.   

[20:115-127] And indeed We made an agreement with Adam previously, he then forgot, We did not find him resolute.    And when We said to the angels, honor Adam, they all did, except Iblis who refused.    We then said; O Adam, indeed he is an enemy of you and your wife, he would cause your eviction from Paradise and you will suffer hardship.    Indeed you will never suffer hunger therein nor will you ever be naked.   And indeed you will never thirst therein and never suffer the heat of the sun.    Then Satan enticed them saying; O Adam shall I show you the tree of eternity and everlasting kingship?    Then they both ate from it, whereupon their bodies became visible to them and they tried to cover themselves with the leaves of Paradise.  And Adam disobeyed his Lord and he then became a transgressor.     Then his Lord chose him, accepted his repentance and guided him.    He said the two of you get out therefrom with the rest as enemies of one another. Therefore, when guidance comes to you from Me, then whoever follows My guidance, he will never go astray nor will he suffer any hardship.    And whoever rejects My reminder, he will then surely have a life of hardship, and We will summon him on the Day of Resurrection blind.    He said, my Lord why did you summon me blind when I used to be a seer.    He said; because when Our proofs came to you, you chose to ignore them, and you are thus ignored today.    And We thus requite the one who transgresses and does not believe in the signs of his Lord. And indeed the suffering of the Hereafter is far more severe and everlasting.